D700 vs. 5D mkII

DPreview has an interesting writeup of the 5d mk2 and they compare it, amongst others, to the d700.

But as I said earlier, I wouldn't use one for sports, there many other offerings in the canon range that suit better, plus bodies change every 2-3 years but you'll keep decent lenses for a long time.
 
Byker28i said:
I've never had problems in the studio shooting with a 5d mk2 when I've borrowed one. I've had the pleasure of borrowing one from someone at work a few times and every time I've been really impressed with the picture quality. It just has a crispness that my 50d doesn't have. Having said that it wouldnt suit me for my outdoor sports shooting. I'm really not sure where this miss of slow af comes from. I've shot gigs and it's never not focussed, not really noticed only having 9 af points as generally I only used centre point only then recompose the shot if needed.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the info, but not really applicable if you only use centre and recompose, try doing that shooting crazy toddlers running around all over the place.

Have you ever used the 51 point 3D tracking on a nikon? Focus on their face, they can run around all they want, the focus point automatically changes and follows them around the viewfinder, I only tried it at the weekend in jessops for the first time and it blew me away
 
scottthehat said:
here is a crop from the 5dmk11 and from the d700 and the d700 has been resized to match.
Click to expand...

But what ISO are those at?

Looks a lot higher than the ISO 800 samples I'm looking at right now. Looks more like 6400. It doesn't surprise me that noise at that ISO stops it recording much more detail.

Compare at normal ISOs, and you will see the difference in detail, despite the 5DII seeming to have a little NR.
 
Last edited:
squishy said:
But what ISO are those at?

Looks a lot higher than the ISO 800 samples I'm looking at right now. Looks more like 6400. It doesn't surprise me that noise at that ISO stops it recording much more detail.

Compare at normal ISOs, and you will see the difference in detail, despite the 5DII seeming to have a little NR.
Click to expand...
ok those were iso 6400.
these are iso 200, still dont see the difference(unless im doing something wrong) and someone can show me.
5d
E5D2hSLI00200crop.jpg

d700
D700hSLI00200crop.jpg
 
come on guys, the images look the same, to anyone they look the same, you will see what you want to in them, are you telling me youd be so damned ****ed with one of them and so delighted with the other cos they are so different.

this is so simple, both cameras are so close in ability with slightly different slants on where they excel but both can produce amazing results if you are good enough and they really are that close that it does not matter.

If someone swapped my nikon gear for canon i would barely care and if they swapped it back again later id barely care again.
 
Well I can see texture in the fabric on the shot with the 5DII that isn't there on the D700 shot.

I'm not saying the 5DII is a better camera, I'm just saying that it is better at 21mp than the D700.
I'm not saying this is relevant to many users. If you stand close enough to pick out the quality difference, you're standing to close to view a print of that size.
But a 21mp camera with a sharp lens will record more details than a 12mp camera.

I'm not some fanboy sycophant canon user, I'm just stating the obvious about what I can see.


Personally (in an ideal world where you can disregard lens mount), I would prefer the D700. But I'd go for the images (and handling, I don't get along quite as well with nikon's layout) from a 5DII anytime. But the D700 has a greater capacity to capture the images (of moving things anyway) in the first place, which would be more useful for my type of photography.
Or I'd have both and use the 5DII for landscapes and macro and the D700 for fast moving stuff. My dream photography set-up would definitely be dual system :).
 
Last edited:
Mahoneyd187 said:
Thanks for the info, but not really applicable if you only use centre and recompose, try doing that shooting crazy toddlers running around all over the place.

Have you ever used the 51 point 3D tracking on a nikon? Focus on their face, they can run around all they want, the focus point automatically changes and follows them around the viewfinder, I only tried it at the weekend in jessops for the first time and it blew me away
Click to expand...

You've not seen my work then. Lots of studio stuff with toddlers, mostly with a 50D, but some with a 5D and I love getting them jumping around. Breaks the ice and it's also good fun :)

Having said that, I'd love to try the multipoint tracking for sports and wildlife. At the end of the day you just get used to what you use and use it appropriately. The last car shoot I was on, the photographer used a 5D mk2 hanging out the back of a car tracking it at speed, whilst going around a corner on a track. I was surprised by his body choice, but he liked it for the quality and the movie mode ( extra footage for websites etc)
 
squishy said:
Well I can see texture in the fabric on the shot with the 5DII that isn't there on the D700 shot.

I'm not saying the 5DII is a better camera, I'm just saying that it is better at 21mp than the D700.
I'm not saying this is relevant to many users. If you stand close enough to pick out the quality difference, you're standing to close to view a print of that size.
But a 21mp camera with a sharp lens will record more details than a 12mp camera.

I'm not some fanboy sycophant canon user, I'm just stating the obvious about what I can see.
Click to expand...

Love these threads..and , when it comes down to megapixels you know the inferior camera's are squirming ;-)
 
Byker28i said:
You've not seen my work then. Lots of studio stuff with toddlers, mostly with a 50D, but some with a 5D and I love getting them jumping around. Breaks the ice and it's also good fun :)

Having said that, I'd love to try the multipoint tracking for sports and wildlife. At the end of the day you just get used to what you use and use it appropriately. The last car shoot I was on, the photographer used a 5D mk2 hanging out the back of a car tracking it at speed, whilst going around a corner on a track. I was surprised by his body choice, but he liked it for the quality and the movie mode ( extra footage for websites etc)
Click to expand...

And do you use centre point focus recompose to shoot jumping kids? I use single point continuous focus, but have to manually track them round the frame. It's not impossible, evidently we both probably do it, but the 3D tracking makes it infinitely easier it really does! I'm not knocking the 5D at all, I'm stuck on what to get, but the AF on the D700 toasts the 5D in every way. It's not a myth, I know plenty of people with 5D's, and the people open enough to put brand loyalty aside always comment on the AF. Not that its criminally bad overall, but against other current offerings, its a weak point...if it wasn't, you wouldn't find a million threads about it on the net and mention of it in practically every review
 
I'm sorry, did someone say the test shots are jpegs? It's bloody meaningless then. Show us raw's!
 
DP's review said:

While there are still other cameras in its class with marginally higher resolution, marginally better high ISO performance, more advanced AF, faster performance, better weather sealing and more solid build quality - and the Sony A900's built-in anti-shake remains unique in the full frame arena - the 5D Mark II is certainly one of the best value for money propositions on the market for image quality - especially in RAW, where you really can see the benefit of all 21 million pixels. Canon has also wisely made only minor tweaks to the external interface, so that 5D users can jump right in and feel at home. Looking at the package as a whole the EOS 5D Mark II seems hard to beat.

But then as so many others (and me) have said, it also says:
So while the 5D Mark II would never be mistaken as a camera aimed at sports or action photographers (thanks to its rather pedestrian AF performance and overall shooting performance)...

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/canoneos5dmarkii/page40.asp

At the end of the day, it's not purely about a body, it's about a system and you need to pick the features you need for the job you expect to do.
 
I think I'll back out of this thread now. It's going in the direction of a general 5DII vs D700 argument, rather than specific to the OP (not that I've helped that at all with my comments on the comparisons, hence the backing out).


I'll wish the OP well with whatever gear he decides to get in the end :).
 
squishy said:
I think I'll back out of this thread now. It's going in the direction of a general 5DII vs D700 argument, rather than specific to the OP (not that I've helped that at all with my comments on the comparisons, hence the backing out).


I'll wish the OP well with whatever gear he decides to get in the end :).
Click to expand...
i agree, both cameras are the dogs and will do the job.
 
Is it true when one is shooting a landscape photo, the 5d2 will perform better in terms if detailness?
 
go to a shop and have a play with each camera, buy what feels best to you

At the end of the day they're both boxes that take comparable photos. Ignore the biased drivel that gets posted on threads like this from the owners of the canon blah or the nikon blah as they will always feel like they've made the best purchase and whilst this may be the case it will be the camera that suits their individual tastes not every bodies.

Ignore the whole more mp is better debate, this has been rolling on for years and has been disproved many a time, not by looking at 100% crops of lab charts but by looking at the works of professional togs who are equally capable of winning awards no matter which camera system they're using. I frankly don't give two hoots if a 100% crop of a lens setup chart is slightly sharper than another I just care that the camera works when it needs to and takes the pictures that I'm happy with.
 
Last edited:
I think that the MP is better thing is not entirely rubbish. If used solely as a marketing tool then I agree with you. But if the pixels are equal in terms of ISO/sharpness and the lens can take advantage of them then I'm happy to have lots of them.

On a P&S I'd rather have 10MP of good quality than 20MP of rubbish ones just cos the marketing department said that the product had to have them.

But I use a 5D2 for studio portraits and love the fact that when shooting kids I can leave a "safety margin" around the subject and then crop the image. It has saved me cutting off toes or fingers loads of times.

When a client asks for a 30" canvass and I've cropped the image I'm glad for the extra pixels.

As I've said before, for me I want a 5D3 to have the 5D2 sensor and the D700 AF system. If anyone finds a Cankon 5D700 let me know.
 
Hodders said:
As I've said before, for me I want a 5D3 to have the 5D2 sensor and the D700 AF system. If anyone finds a Cankon 5D700 let me know.
Click to expand...

I believe there is a zoo in Japan that have tried cross breeding them ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top